Islamists: World’s Worst People

At least 29 pupils and a teacher have been killed in a pre-dawn attack by suspected Islamists on a school in northeastern Nigeria, reports say.

Eyewitnesses said some of the victims were burned alive in the attack, in Mamudo town, Yobe state.

Dozens of schools have been burned in attacks by Islamists since 2010.

Yobe is one of three states where President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in May, sending thousands of troops to the area.

A reporter from the Associated Press found chaotic scenes at the hospital in nearby Potiskum, where traumatised parents struggled to identify their children among the charred bodies and gunshot victims.

Survivors said suspected militants arrived with containers full of fuel and set fire to the school.

Some pupils were burned alive, others were shot as they tried to flee.

All for the crime of being Christian.

UPDATE: Thanks for those pointing out that the victims in this case were likely not only Christians. I jumped to that conclusion because the Islamists in Nigeria have been committing atrocities against Nigerian Christians for some time now.

I still believe that Islamists — politicized Muslims who want to impose sharia — are among the Worst People In The World today. Not all Islamists are the same, but if there were no political Islam, the world would be less bloody.

They do seem to be meaner than rattlesnakes, don’t they? You have probably seen the video of the Islamist beheading the 2 Syrians with a dull knife, whacking away like someone trying to peel a potato with a dollar-store paring knife. He could have had the minimal decency to sharpen the knife, but no.

Or maybe, for the crime being anything but the right kind of Muslim or Islamist. The BBC article notes that this group “is fighting to overthrow the government and create an Islamic state in Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim north” so presumably their more frequent targets are other Muslims. For people like this, there is only one acceptable religious way to be.

“Boko originally means fake but came to signify Western education, while haram means forbidden.

“Since the Sokoto caliphate, which ruled parts of what is now northern Nigeria, Niger and southern Cameroon, fell under British control in 1903, there has been resistance among the area’s Muslims to Western education.

“Many Muslim families still refuse to send their children to government-run ‘Western schools’, a problem compounded by the ruling elite which does not see education as a priority.”

Despite this last bit, it seems possible to me that the victims in this latest tale may have even been Muslims; I get the general impression that what infuriates Islamists beyond all else is possibility that their co-religionists might practice their faith (or even just go about their daily lives) in ways that don’t hew to their particular fussy interpretation.

Just curious if you are willing to extend to these people the same humanity you extend to slave-holders and those who fought and killed in the Civil War to uphold slavery. Will you write extensively about how these people deserve to be loved by their friends and family, and how just because they killed their enemies, they can still be good people? Where exactly do you draw the line?

Is there any wonder why in the case of Syria I side with Assad? Actually in Syria Shia Islamists are actually fighting on the same side as Syrian Christians against Sunni Islamists who are beheading Christians, Alawites and even fellow Sunnis who are deemed as supporting the government. I am cold blooded on this issue. I say when your dealing with Islamists you have to be willing to line up all their men of fighting age against a wall and shoot them. That’s the only way to deal with them.

This is why I want a ban on Muslim immigration to this country, which is a problem of a somewhat different order than closing the border and having a zero amnesty policy (although I support that too). Because we share a Christian foundation and share the same spatial order, we have to be diplomatic with Hispanics and Latin America. Whereas, with Islamists we are dealing with enemies, pure and simple. If too much immigration from south of the border is already causing troubles between friends, just imagine the troubles caused by the immigration of people who are not our friends by any stretch of the imagination.

This reminds me of a scene from the Revolutionary War pic, “The Patriot”, in which British troops chained the doors to a church full of South Carolina worshipers and set fire to it, burning the Christians alive.

The fact that the President of Nigeria declared a state of emergency in this area and sent thousands of troops to restore the peace, and yet even today rebel soldiers can commit such atrocities reflects the poor state of democratic rule in that country.

By the way, did anyone else consider it strange that this school would be filled with students in the “pre-dawn hours”?

I would still give pride of place in genocide to the Nazis, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. The Islamists are monsters indeed but they have figured out yet how to scale their atrocities to compete with the big boys from the 20th century.

Horrible those these events are, the author should be reminded that they are no worse than what Christians once did to Muslims, Jews to their ancient enemies, et al. And it should be remembered that what is often blamed on religion is really more tribal in nature. Who is to say that Islamists are any worse than Christians during the Inquisition and Crusades, than various bad actors of several faiths in the Bosnian wars, radical Hindus in India, etc. Let’s face it, there are a lot of people on this planet who don’t share our values or are consumed by hatred for one another.

More to the point, Islamists come in many stripes, ranging from peaceful religious types to the people in your note. Applying a broad brush to them just conceals the reality of what you are dealing with, and of course this can lead to stupid actions (e.g. think of Iraq).

Your Christian persecution complex is showing – nothing in that article says it was a Christian school, or that the people killed were Christians. A Nigerian news article says it was a government school. Islamists in Afghanistan and Pakistan routinely kill people just for going to non-fundamentalist schools, not because they are Christians.

And what about all those Catholics and Protestants who murdered one another throughout history for wrongly worshipping Him? Were they the world’s worst people too?

[NFR: Oh for pity’s sake, some of you people are so stunningly literal-minded. Manning’s Corollary never fails. But yes, I would say anybody who deliberately murders a school full of children qualifies as among the World’s Worst. — RD]

NFR: Oh for pity’s sake, some of you people are so stunningly literal-minded. Manning’s Corollary never fails. But yes, I would say anybody who deliberately murders a school full of children qualifies as among the World’s Worst. — RD

With a post title of “Islamists: World’s Worst People” what did you expect? It seems fair to point out that extremists of all stripes have been doing horrible things throughout history. It also seems fair to point out that Nigeria is a former British colony whose northern and southern parts were artificially shoved together, leading to constant tension.

People tend to rally around religions, for better or worse, and things can get messy when they do that. The exit of the moors from Europe was followed immediately by the Spanish Inquisition, which has always struck me as more than a coincidence. It looks, at least in part, as a mechanism to solidify power using religion as a weapon. My point is that everyone does it. This is not to let anyone off the hook or to ignore the unique pathology of any extremist thinking, but to remind people that each of us is capable of the same range of things. Ideology, including religious ideology has been used and abused throughout history. In a hundred years it may not be Islamists but some other form of idiots who are the focus of derision, fear, and outrage. The common denominator is the extremist part. Suggesting that Islamism is somehow special is tempting, but I’ve heard similar arguments about the Japanese, about communists, and about Christians.

[NFR: I expect you to understand that “Worst Person In The World” is an Internet meme started by Keith Olbermann a few years ago to describe whoever he didn’t like that day. It’s hyperbolic on purpose — but in the case of people who burn to death schoolchildren, I think the hyperbole is minimal to non-existent. — RD]

The majority of these comments derive a false conclusion from two true premises: That current U.S. foreign policy is simultaneously stupid and evil, and that it is unfriendly to Islamists. Therefore, they conclude, Islamists must not really be a problem. I notice a lot of that basic fallacy at TAC’s comments.

“The common denominator is the extremist part.”
Is it? Was Nixon an extremist? What about Churchill? I’m not sure that extremism explains atrocity at all. Atrocity is a thing which it doesn’t make sense to say that some kind of atrocity is worse than some other kind (extremist atrocity is worse than liberal atrocity, say). So maybe people aren’t going along “condemning these atrocities” because just bc. it’s an Islamist group (extremists!) bombing a school doesn’t make their school-bombing any worse than when American bombs (liberals? pragmatists?) kill children in their homes, does it?

It was a little jarring to see the head to this post at TAC about Islamists being the world’s worst people . When I espied this, I pondered, won’t that possibly incline people to have interventionist thoughts? Then I read the post and I understood. Christians were the victims. That totally explained it. Christians are a special victim class to the religious right in the US.

[NFR: Imagine that: people having a special regard for the fate of their co-religionists abroad. What monstrous fanatics! — RD]

Your Christian persecution complex is showing – nothing in that article says it was a Christian school, or that the people killed were Christians. A Nigerian news article says it was a government school. Islamists in Afghanistan and Pakistan routinely kill people just for going to non-fundamentalist schools, not because they are Christians

And your expertise in this issue is….? Zero, will be my guess. I also see you are not a good scholar of history.

“The common denominator is the extremist part.”
Is it? Was Nixon an extremist? What about Churchill? I’m not sure that extremism explains atrocity at all.

You are correct that politicians and bureaucrats can do horrible things, and have, and will again. My point was more along the lines of extremism being a common thread throughout history. I’m note sure that there is no neat and tidy “explanation” of atrocity. Recognizing atrocity and working against those who commit it is a good start though.

It was a little jarring to see the head to this post at TAC about Islamists being the world’s worst people . When I espied this, I pondered, won’t that possibly incline people to have interventionist thoughts? Then I read the post and I understood. Christians were the victims. That totally explained it. Christians are a special victim class to the religious right in the US.

I would say anybody who deliberately murders a school full of children qualifies as among the World’s Worst.

But your headline didn’t just say that these particular Islamists are the world’s worst people, it said that Islamists in general are the world’s worst people.

Normally I’m not one to defend Islamists, but not many of them favor this kind of terrorist slaughter. The term “Islamist” refers to those who favor creating a government and culture bound to the laws of Islam. It doesn’t necessarily mean using the worst possible means like this of enforcing Islamic Law. In fact, this sort of violence is actually forbidden in Islamic Law, particularly against other Muslims, as appears to be the case here.

So I think your headline, to be at all accurate would have to be more qualifying:

“Violent Islamists Who Target Schoolchildren Are The Worst People In The World.”

And even then, that wouldn’t include the Newtown Killer, who wasn’t an Islamist, or that Norwegian anti-immigration right-winger, but who both surely qualifies just as much as these folks.

Beyng says:
I like how only a small minority of comments are actually condemning these atrocities. The rest are gasping in mock horror that you would dare criticize these people because Hitler and Jesus.

[NFR: You got that right. — RD]

Interestingly, neither Rod nor Beyng actually condemn these atrocities in their own postings, they only condemn commentators for not doing that, or they make false assertions that the victims were Christians (as if that would somehow make the atrocities worse), or they use this terrible crime as an opportunity to make a political point about both Islamists and liberals. A very strange thought process indeed.

Some of the Christians in that part of the world are pretty horrible as well – namely the “child witch hunters” that convince parents that their small children or even infants are demon-possessed witches and actually convince their families to participate in those children’s torture and murder. Google “child witches of Nigeria” for more or visit this site for the organization within Nigeria fighting to end these practices:http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/witchcraft.html

There was a documentary on British television just a couple of months ago about similar activities in the Congo, were there are estimated to be 50,000 “possessed” children being held prisoner in churches and another 20,000 left homeless after being cast out by their families when a preacher identified them as a witch.

Interestingly, neither Rod nor Beyng actually condemn these atrocities in their own postings, they only condemn commentators for not doing that,

And this is wrong in what sense, as much as I disagree with the whole premise in general (yes, I can read English and I read Rod’s Blog)? There is, as an alternative, Christian Amanpour, if you know what I mean.

To those who point out that others (including the US) have killed indiscriminately at times. While this may be true it’s an example of the tu quoque logical fallacy. It doesn’t excuse the Islamist behavior in the slightest. Moreover there is moral difference between accident collateral damage and targeted killing of noncombatants.

“extremism being a common thread throughout history”
It is, was, and will be, but I think it’s also common for people to focus on condemning extremist violence exclusively when there’s plenty of violence committed in the name of, I don’t know let’s say, “moderate” or “acceptable” ideologies. We can’t just say extremism is worse than liberalism, say, because it’s more violent, because it simply is not more violent.

As far as one can trust Wikipedia, Boko Haram really doesn’t seem to be “Islamist” in the conventional sense — more of a personality cult:

Boko Haram was founded as an indigenous group, turning itself into a Jihadist group in 2009.[4] It proposes that interaction with the Western World is forbidden, and also supports opposition to the Muslim establishment and the government of Nigeria.[32]

The members of the group do not interact with the local Muslim population[33] and have carried out assassinations in the past of anyone who criticises it, including Muslim clerics.[30]

In a 2009 BBC interview, Mohammed Yusuf, then leader of the group, stated his belief that the concept of a spherical Earth is contrary to Islamic teaching and should be rejected, along with Darwinian evolution and the concept of rain originating from water evaporated by the sun.[34] Before his death, Yusuf reiterated the group’s objective of changing the current education system and rejecting democracy.[35] Nigerian academic Hussain Zakaria told BBC News that the controversial cleric had a graduate education, spoke proficient English, lived a lavish lifestyle and drove a Mercedes-Benz.[34]

And this is wrong in what sense, as much as I disagree with the whole premise in general

I just thought it interesting that these two would criticize others for not doing what they, themselves, did not do.

Not that I found this at all confusing. I didn’t read Rod’s failure to condemn the attack as meaning that he approves of it, or has some moral failing. But I have a hard time understanding how he and Beyng see a moral failing on the part of other commentators, who aren’t explicitly condemning these attacks either.

In both cases, the atrocious nature of the attacks is so obvious that neither of us bothered to condemn them. Rod’s post wasn’t a condemnation of the attack, it was a condemnation of the political/religious motives behind the attack. (As if it would somehow make it better if these kids were killed, not because they were Christians, but because they were receiving a secular education. I guess we’ll never know if Rod would have posted this if he’d known ahead of time that Christianity had nothing to do with the attacks – that not fitting in with his narrative).

And then, using this false note to attack his critics, who thought his political/religious analysis was off, by claiming that they aren’t condemning the attacks, when he didn’t do that either – well, that’s just bad faith argumentation. I’m pointing out it’s a sleazy debate tactic that could be used against him too.

Yes, I’d say these people qualify as the worst people in the world today. They rank right up there with the Christian mob who murdered Hypatia, the Nazis who murdered Jews, the Buddhists who murdered Muslims in Myanmar, the Spanish conquistadors…

…I’m not saying that to announced “Christians are bad too.” Most Christians I’ve read here denounce the Spanish Inquisition, while going to great pains to distinguish it from Christianity, etc.

But let’s keep it straight. If everyone were talking about Christianists, Christians would be complaining that the name is too much like Christian and we’re not all like those bad people.

Bottom line, no hidden prejudices: There is no greater abomination against the Creator of the Universe than those who would kill in His name. Period.

And the staff of those schools ought to be armed.

[NFR: Outside of a few nuts in Idaho and sundry remote places, there is no such thing as Christianists, meaning people who want a confessional Christian state. Actual Islamists run Iran, Turkey, and until this week, held the Egyptian presidency. They also run a little activist group called Al Qaeda, and its affiliates. — RD]

“I still believe that Islamists — politicized Muslims who want to impose sharia — are among the Worst People In The World today. Not all Islamists are the same, but if there were no political Islam, the world would be less bloody.”

Relatively “moderate” Islamists may be a lesser evil than more radical and violent Islamists, but that doesn’t mean that we should downplay their sins. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the AKP party in Turkey are supposed to be relatively “moderate,” but that didn’t stop them from pushing authoritarian policies which has led the Egyptian and Turkish peoples to protest en mass against their governments. The result of the protests in Egypt was that the military overthrew President Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood government. In Turkey, if Prime Minister Erdogan and the AKP hadn’t neutered the military, the traditional guarantor of Turkish secularism, then the military would have likely already overthrown Erdogan and his government.

And it is now likely that both the Muslim Brotherhood and the AKP party will become more radical. Since the overthrow of Morsi, members of the Muslim Brotherhood, both top officials and rank-and-file members, have been saying that they won’t go down without a fight and that there will be bloodshed. And when combined with the more hard-line Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood could be a formidable force. Turkey under the AKP government has already been publicly supportive of Hamas. Since Hamas began opposing Assad, the terrorist group has lost both Syria and Iran as patrons. Hamas will probably now turn to Turkey as its new patron. The mass protests in Turkey have caused Erdogan and other AKP leaders to become paranoid and the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt will no doubt cause their paranoia to grow exponentially.

According to Walter Russel Meade’s blog in The American Interest, “For Erdogan, the best way to respond is to patronize Hamas. This would burnish his Islamist credentials and play well to the peanut gallery at home. It would also irk the Egyptian army, which Erdogan wouldn’t mind doing.”